A Message to Republicans - It's Time to Lead

After the election of President Obama in 2008, the outlook for the Republican Party was not good.  They had just lost the Presidential election.  And to make it worse, they lost seats in both the House and the Senate.  The Democrats had written them off.  The media had written them off.  The Republicans had written themselves off, thinking that they would be a permanent minority party.  All they wanted to do was get along and maintain the seats in Congress that they already had.

Of course, with this attitude, there would be no hope.  The conservatives of the Republican Party were already upset with the out-of-control government spending and lack of leadership that had taken place during the previous Republican majority in Congress.  Because of their disenchantment with the National Republican Party, they either did not show up to vote in the 2008 Presidential election, or they chose to vote for a 3rd party candidate.  The Republicans had lost their base.  The elected Republicans thought it more prudent to compromise on principle rather than take a stand on it.  They had basically compromised their way into a minority.  In other words, they failed to lead.

Then, the President handed them a gift, and that gift was Obamacare.  The President, along with a Democrat-controlled Congress, pushed through a universal health care plan that no one had read, was going to cost the U.S. a lot of money that it did not have, and it would eventually put control of health care into the hands of bureaucrats.  This was not a popular bill, no matter what the media or politicians tried to tell us.  While most people agree that there are aspects of our health care system that need to be addressed and fixed, they knew that a government run system was definitely not the way to go.

Anyway, this bill helped to propel the recrudescence of conservatism in the U.S.  This conservatism was seen most prominently through the Tea Party.  People were finally stepping and saying "We've had enough of this!"  People were tired of the government stepping into their lives.  They were tired of the government spending money they did not have.  They were tired of the arrogance of elected officials telling them what is best for them.  People came to realize once again that the government is "of the people, by the people, and for the people."  They realized that we do not have to accept the status quo.

So the people began to act, and rally, and have their voice heard.  They elected candidates in their primaries that carried the same values that they had.  They elected people that had the same vision for America's future.  They took on many of the incumbents, and they were successful in unseating many of them.  The people were finally getting a chance to see real representation in Washington.  The Republicans won a resounding victory in the House, and they made tremendous gains in the Senate.

Alas, it seems that the Republican leadership has started to fail us again.  I realize that the leaders in the Senate are limited in what they can do, since they are the minority party in that chamber.  However, the leaders in the House have no such excuse.  They have a majority, yet they fail to lead.  Why is that?  Do they not know how to lead?  Are they afraid of confrontation?  Are they afraid that they might upset some people?

Well, this has frustrated me for some time now, so I have several suggestions for the Republican leadership to win back the people that voted for them.  If they lose these people again, they may never get them back.

1. You won because of yor agenda.  Now implement that agenda.  The Republicans need to realize that people voted for them because of the agenda that they ran on.  We voted for them because of that agenda.  We expect them implement that agenda when they get into office.
2. Compromise is not something you should want, or expect.  The Democrat idea of compromise is for the Republicans to agree to do things the Democrat way.  They do not expect to meet in the middle.  They want it their way, or nothing at all.  That is how the Republicans should be.  They won the election in an overwhelming manner.  People wanted your agenda, which is why they voted for you.  They did not vote for you so that you could compromise away the agenda.
3. You cannot make everyone happy.  This should be obvious.  There are people that did not vote for Republicans, and they never will vote for one.  So why even try to appease them?  No matter what you do, they will be against it.  So, you need to do what the people put you there to do - implement the agenda.
4. Don't become moderates.  This is what hurt the Republican party from about 1998-2009.  After they took the nation by storm in 1994, they started to stray from their fiscally conservative ways.  They started spending like the Democrats.  They thought they were undefeatable.  And because of that, they lost power.  The Republicans nominated a moderate for President in 2008.  If not for the conservative VP candidate that he picked, the Republicans would have lost by an even greater margin in the election.  For some reason, the establishment Republicans think that the party needs to be more moderate in order to win elections.  However, why would a Democrat vote for a Republican trying to be like a Democrat?  The answer is that they will not do that.  They already have a real Democrat running for their party.
5. Conservatism will win when it is tried.  When Republicans try to be like moderates, they lose elections.  However, when they run as conservatives, they win.  There is not much more to say here.  People want elected Republicans to be conservative.  When they are not, people will not show up to vote them back into office.
6. Continue to listen to the people that voted you into office.  This is something that no politician has been able to do.  The Democrats don't listen to their constituents, either, but that is their problem.  You are an elected official, put there by the people.  You need to listen to them.  You are to be there doing business for the people.
7. The seat belongs to the people, not the elected official.  When Sen. Ted Kennedy passed away, the media wondered what would happen to Kennedy's seat on the Senate.  The man that eventually took Kennedy's place (now Sen. Scott Brown) answered that (it is not Sen. Kennedy's seat.  It is the people's seat.)  Too often, elected officials forget that they are there to serve the people.  The people are not there to serve them.
8. We want leaders.  A leader makes tough decisions.  They take responsibility.  They take a stand on difficult issues.  They risk losing popularity in order to do what is right, not politically expedient.  All too often today, our elected officials make their decisions based on what is politically popular, not what is right.  We want leaders who do what is right, not necessarily what is popular.  One only needs to look at the state of Wisconsin.  The Republican Governor and Legislature made the principled decision and stood tall in the midst of adversity in order to get difficult legislation passed.  The were leaders, and they refused to be beaten down.
9. Democrats want the power that you now have.  Don't give them an excuse to get it back.  The Democrats will stop at nothing to get power back.
10. Don't start to look at the next election.  One of my biggest pet peeves is people that start to run for office the day after the elections.  These people need to leard that we elected you to enact an agenda, to pass bills that benefit the people.  We did not elect you so that you could spend your time running for office again (and youa re getting paid by us to do that).  People will vote for you if you do the right things while in office.  Concentrate on doing what is right, and the elections will turn out fine.

Americans want strong leaders.  They want people who can make the tough decisions, not just the popular ones.  We do not like it when our leaders compromise on principle in order to get along with others.  You were elected into office in order implement an agenda and represent the people.  And we expect you to do just that.

The Health Care Summit - Does it really matter?

I am sure we all have our own separate views on the necessity of health care reform - how we go about it, what needs to be reformed, should the government be involved, should it be the priority, etc.  So, in order to show the American people that he truly wishes for a bipartisan bill, the President has called a summit of Republicans and Democrats, Senators and Representatives, to try to devise a bill that everyone can agree with.

First, almost everyone can see through this charade.  The President is trying to regain political capital, which he has lost over the past several months.  The President, widely seen as a failing leader, needs to garner any momentum that he can muster in order to help his party have any chance of staying in power come the mid-term elections in November.  Besides, the administration has already developed a bill.  They are just trying to get everyone to agree with them now.

Second, the Democrats will not accept any Republican changes.  They want nothing to do with tort reform (after all, the lawyer community is one of their biggest supporters).  They want nothing to do with insurance portability and increased competition (that process is too democratic for the Democrats, which is slightly amusing and ironic at the same time).  They only want Republicans to sign on to this bill so that the Republicans can share in the blame when this passes and the American people reject it.  After all, the Democrats could have passed this already without any Republicans.  They could not get members of their own party to support some of the measures in the bill.

Third, why do we need a bipartisan bill?  What is so magical about bipartisanship?  Our elected officials should be more interested in doing what is right for America, not what is best for them and their cronies.  They should focus on bills that pass the muster of Constitutionality, not on bills that effectively attempt to re-write the Constitution.  When you get right down to the basics, constituents on both sides do not want bipartisanship.  We vote on people, not based on how well they compromise, but rather based on the issues that they stand for.  I do not want someone I voted for who is currently serving in office to go back on a campaign promise and do something he said he would not do, just so he could be bipartisan.  There is no character in that.  Character is standing up for what you believe in, regardless of the political climate.  Bipartisanship is a sign of weakness, a coward's way out of a tough decision.

Fourth, the Senate is proposing the use of reconciliation to pass health care.  This is a controversial maneuver, where only 51 votes are needed to end debate and to bring a bill up for a vote.  The only time, according to Senate rules, that this is used is in the budget process, since money needs to be appropriated in order to keep the government running.  Normally, 60 votes are needed to invoke cloture, which basically means to end debate and to send the bill for a final vote.  When the final vote is cast, they only need 51 votes for passage (but the media does not clarify this - they allow the American people to think that the bill will pass only if 60 Senators vote for it).

If I can hearken back only a few years, the Republicans threatened to use this maneuver in approving judges that were nominated to the federal bench.  However, McCain and his band of merry men (14 of them, in fact) did not want this to happen, because the reconciliation rule in the Senate was much more revered than even the Constitution.

Anyway, the Republicans should have used reconciliation at that point, as their role in approving judges was on an advise and consent basis.  In other words, it is the President's job to nominate the judges, and the Senate's job to say yea or nay.  The Democrats at that time were adamantly against it, from Sen. Obama to Sen. Clinton to Sen. Biden to Sen. Kerry, and most every Democrat Senator.  They said that the Senate needs to remain the deliberative body and that rules should not be eased in order to ram things through for approval.  They said that the Senate is not there to 'rubber stamp' what the President wants.  A few years ago, debate was important.  It needed to happen.

Now, the shoe is on the other foot.  They want to pass this bill so bad that they can taste it.  They seem to conveniently forget the stand on reconciliation that they took only 2 or 3 years ago. Now it is OK to use this maneuver.  Alexis de Tocqueville termed this the 'Tyranny of the Majority.'  In other words, if a majority party is in power, they can pass anything they want, breaking any rules they want, and force their will on anyone and everyone.

This is the problem with our elected officials today.  They do what they want, when they want to, without a care for those they represent.  We are finally starting to see a backlash.  A recent poll shows that Congress has a 10% approval rating, and we know why.  They do not listen to the people that they represent.  Many entrenched Democrats (including Harry Reid), and some Republicans, will be losing their offices in November because the American voting public has had enough.  And if they keep up these shenanigans, even more will be out office come election time.  And that is not necessarily a bad thing.

The Top Conservatives in America

For those who know me, I am a Republican. But I am not just a Republican, I am a conservative Republican. Conservative is the key word. There are many Republicans in this country, but only a portion of them are conservative. Anyway, I came across a list last week of the 100 most influential conservative voices in America today. I found it fascinating that this list is from the UK Telegraph. I am not sure why the Brits feel the need to make this list, but I do find this list amusing, given some of the names that they put on the list.

Here is this list (along with some of my thoughts):

1. Dick Cheney
2. Rush Limbaugh
3. Matt Drudge - Internet gossip guy - Don't know about this one, but he should not be ranked this high
4. Sarah Palin
5. Robert Gates - Defense Secretary - I have no idea how he made this list
6. Glenn Beck
7. Roger Ailes
8. David Petraeus
9. Paul Ryan - Wisconsin Congressman
10. Tim Pawlenty - Minnesota Governor
11. Mitt Romey
12. George W. Bush
13. John Roberts - Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
14. Haley Barbour - Mississippi Governor and former head of the Republican Party
15. Eric Cantor - Virginia Congressman
16. John McCain - I cannot believe he is on this list, much less this high on the list. Where are his conservative credentials (in areas not associated with national defense)?
17. Mike Pence - Indiana Congressman
18. Bob McDonnell - Governor-elect of Virginia
19. Newt Gingrich - I don't think he should be this high on the list. He has strayed from true conservatism over the past couple of years.
20. Mike Huckabee - The Gomer Pyle of modern politics
21. Andrew Breitbart - Another internet news guy - He should be ranked above Drudge.
22. Bobby Jindal - Governor of Louisiana
23. Sean Hannity
24. Charles Krauthammer - Columnist and political commentator - He should be on the list, but this is too high of a ranking for him
25. David Brooks - NY Times columnist - He is the token Republican on the NY Times editorial staff. He is a Republican, not a conservative. He has no business being on this list.
26. Mark Levin - He should be rated much higher, especially after reading 2 of his books (Men in Black and Liberty and Tyranny) this past year.
27. Mitch McConnell - Senate Majority Leader
28. Laura Ingraham
29. Joe Lieberman - Conservative? Really? This is one reason the Brits are not a player on the world stage.
30. Antonin Scalia
31. John Boehner
32. Karl Rove
33. David Frum - Writer
34. Michael Steele
35. Edwin Feulner - President, Heritage Foundation
36. John Bolton - He should probably be higher up on this list
37. Tom Coburn - Oklahoma Senator
38. Rich Lowry - Editor, National Review Online
39. Mitch Daniels - Indiana Governor
40. John Thune - South Dakota Senator (and the guy who beat Tom Daschle)
41. Ron Paul - Texas Congressman - I do not believe he belongs on this list.
42. Michelle Malkin
43. George Will
44. Clarence Thomas
45. Grover Norquist - President, Americans for Tax Reform
46. Dick Morris - Strategist - I do not believe that Morris is a conservative. He is an excellent strategist with incredible insight and instincts, but not a conservative.
47. Michael Savage - This guy is an idiot.
48. Mary Matalin (the wife of James Carville, one of the most liberal idiots in the U.S.)
49. Richard Lugar - Indiana Senator - He is too friendly with liberals, including the current administration.
50. Carly Fiorina - Former head of HP and current contender for Barbara Boxer's senate seat - It is too early to tell on this one.
51. Rick Perry - Texas Governor
52. David Keene
53. Kevin McCarthy - California Congressman
54. Morton Blackwell
55. Arnold Schwarzenegger - Conservative? He threw out any and all conservatism a long time ago.
56. Alex Castellanos
57. Steve Schmidt
58. William Kristol
59. Rudy Giuliani - Conservative on national defense and fiscal areas, liberal on social issues.
60. Jon Voight - Actor
61. Jeff Flake - Arizona Congressman
62. Frank Luntz
63. Jim DeMint - South Carolina Senator
64. Chris Ruddy - Newsmax Founder and CEO
65. Erick Erickson
66. Victor Davis Hanson
67. Joe Scarborough - This guy is an insult to conservatives and Republicans. He has thrown us under the bus after joining MSNBC, and he tries to redefine conservatism in his book.
68. Paul Gigot
69. Olympia Snowe - This one is laughable. She is the most liberal Republican in the Senate. She is practically a Democrat vote.
70. Michael Barone - He has tremendous political insight. I do not think of him as a conservative, but rather a political wonk.
71. Dick Armey
72. Tucker Carlson
73. Judd Gregg - New Hampshire Senator
74. Ann Coulter
75. James Dobson
76. Jeb Bush
77. Joe Wilson - South Carolina Congressman, famous for the "You Lie!" comment (which, by the way, was right on target)
78. Meg Whitman - California gubernatorial candidate
79. Lou Dobbs - More of a populist than a conservative
80. Michelle Bachmann - Minnesota Congresswoman - She should probably be ranked higher, as she is one of the few Republicans who will actually stand up to the Democrat establishment.
81. Marco Rubio - Florida Senatorial candidate
82. Jack Keane
83. Lindsey Graham - South Carolina Senator - He has become very moderate, and he backs amnesty for illegal aliens. He should not be on this list.
84. Thomas Sowell
85. Bill O'Reilly - Like Lou Dobbs, he is a populist, not a conservative.
86. John Kasich - Ohio Gubernatorial candidate and former congressman
87. Eric Odom
88. Patriuck Ruffini
89. Fred Thompson
90. Tony Perkins
91. Peggy Noonan - She should not be on this list. Just because she was a speech writer for Reagan does not give her the credentials to be on this list.
92. Clifford May
93. Charlie Crist - Florida Governor - He is becoming too moderate in order to win Florida Governor race.
94. Jon Huntsman Jr.
95. Liz Cheney
96. R. Emmett Tyrrell
97. Mark Thiessen
98. Mike Murphy
99. Tom DeLay
100. Mark Sanford - South Carolina Governor - Really?

I am tired of Republican pansies

We live in an age where the Democrat Party runs roughshod over anyone in their way and will destroy anyone and everything in its path. They have no qualms about accusing people of racism and ruining the character of people in order to further their own political agenda.

And now the Republicans want to play nice when it comes to Sonia Sotomayor and the Supreme Court. I am not saying that they should treat her as the Democrats did to Clarence Thomas or Samuel Alito or John Roberts or Robert Bork. But they should not be afraid to come out against her and question her actions and her words. This is a legitimate time to do so. And it is part of their role in the nomination process.

However, the Republicans are afraid of offending the Hispanics in this country. They are afraid of offending women. They do not want a harsh tone. They want to be nice, as can be seen in this article on foxnews.com. However, they have short memories. Do they forget how the Democrats treated any Republican nominee to the courts, especially Miguel Estrada? The Democrats would not allow a vote on him because he was Hispanic. I guess the Hispanic community has a short memory.

The beltway Republicans are mad at Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich for speaking out against this nominee. These 2 men have backed up what they have said about her with facts. They are not making things up. They are passionate about their beliefs and what they think is right for this country. Yet, Republicans in Washington are pusillanimous, feckless, and useless. They would rather pick a fight with non-elected public figures than do battle over the direction of the high court.

The Republican establishment just wants to get along. They think that by being more like Democrats, they can regain power. Even one-time conservative stalwarts like Orrin Hatch and John Cornyn are being sucked up into this shameless approach to politics. I guess they have not figured out that Democrats do not want Republicans in office (no matter what their ideology might happen to be), and true conservative, core, grass-roots Republicans do not want Democrat Lite in office with a republican nameplate.

We want people who stand up for the values that we believe in. Let us not forget that we ran a candidate for President who tried to be a Democrat. And we lost big-time. This approach does not work. Just look at Arlen Specter. He had to change parties in order to have a chance to get elected, because the Republicans in Pennsylvania were tired of him selling us out.

According to Peggy Noonan, who was a speech writer for President Reagan and someone who fancies herself a conservative, conservatives like Limbaugh and Republicans like Gingrich should act like grownups. She called the Sotomayor pick 'a "brilliant political pick" because the GOP has struggled to attract and retain Hispanics and women, and because Sotomayor's rags-to-riches story is so moving.' (I note here that these issues have nothing to do with the makings of a Supreme Court Justice). What about Clarence Thomas's story? That did not impress the Democrats. That did not cause them to treat him better. Where was Peggy Noonan then?

She then goes on to say that '"Politically she's [Sotomayor] like a beautiful doll containing a canister of poison gas: Break her and you die," Noonan wrote.' Is Noonan for real? Did she forget what Reagan did and stood for in our once-great party?

She then sums it up like this: '"Excite the base? How about excite a moderate, or interest an independent?" she wrote. "How about gain the attention of people who aren't already on your side?"' Noonan makes me sick. She should be excommunicated from our party and should not be considered as a conservative by anyone (except, of course, by the New York Times, and MSNBC, who happen to love these stand-up-for-nothing Republicans).

This is just ludicrous. Without the base, the Republican Party will not win. Basically, she is saying to the base of the party, 'Hey, you don't matter any more. Go find your own party. We would rather be like Democrats and ruin this country and never win another election." As far as I am concerned, this woman is an embarrassment. I am sure Reagan is doing somersaults in his grave right now.

Compromise does not win elections. Standing firm on what you believe will win elections. Conservatism wins when it is on the ballot. All we need to do is go back to Reagan, the Contract with America, and, to a certain degree, George W. Bush. We should not run from the conservative mantle. Rather, we should embrace it and be proud of it. Not like these pansies now who claim to represent us.

More Supreme Court thoughts....

Well, it has been a few days since Sonia Sotomayor was nominated to be the next Supreme Court Justice. What have we learned since then?

Well, we learned that the President and his administration think that no one should oppose her. I guess this is due to the fact that we are to do exactly as the President tells us to do. He knows all and see all; and, therefore, we should just fall in line.

We cannot oppose her. If we do, then we are anti-Hispanic, anti-woman, anti-minority, anti-diabetes, anti-Obama. Basically, we are just a bunch of redneck bigots.

They like to tell us that she has a compelling life story, as if this was the first time this ever happened. This is not the case. I would like to urge you to read Clarence Thomas's book My Grandfather's Son. He had a very compelling life story, and look how he was treated, especially by the current V.P.

When the Democrats opposed Republican nominees, they never did so on grounds of character or judicial ability. They did so based on personal attacks and the fact that they were nominated by a Republican President. If the Democrats were so bent on minorities in judicial positions, then they would not have filibustered Miguel Estrada. They should have supported him simply because of his lineage. Now, they try to portray those against Sotomayor as racists? Is there a pot calling a kettle black somewhere? I am not quite sure what hypocrisy smells like, but I think this might be it.

I would like to see the best person be nominated to the Supreme Court. I do not want to see tokens on the court. If she is the best person for the job, then she should be there. If not, then she should not be there. It's that simple. However, I know it will not happen like this.

The Democrats do not need any Republicans to pass this nomination through, even though they will most likely pick up a few along the way. I would like to see Republicans, though, stand up for American and stand for what is right. They need to ask the serious kinds of questions that need to be asked of a nominee to the Supreme Court. Then we, as Americans, can judge whether or not this nominee is qualified.

What is a moderate?

To me, a moderate is someone who does not want to take a stance on a difficult issue. They wait to see how the majority decide, and they just jump in line with them. That is a moderate.

Too many of these people have infiltrated the Republican Party. Thankfully, one of them just left for the Democrat Party, and that would be Arlen Specter. In fact, he was a liberal. he passed by moderate a long time ago.

My problem now is that the Democrats are saying the Republican Party needs to be more moderate. They are too right-wing now. I would say that this is hypocrisy at its finest. When was the last time that the Democrats allowed a moderate to have a prominent position within their party? Does anyone remember what they did to Joe Lieberman? They do not want moderation in their party. They want strict adherence to a specific left-wing agenda.

However, the Democrats are on to something that the Republicans have not yet figured out: Moderates do not help you win elections. Rather, they will pull you down. That is the reason that they want the moderates on the Republican side. They know that moderates do not stand for anything, so they want them with the Republicans in order to split the party apart.

Look what has happened to the GOP when they allow moderates to lead: They lost control of the House, the lost control of the Senate, and John McCain was beaten handily in the 2008 Presidential election. Moderates do not help the Republican Party win. Rather, just the opposite is true.

Now, Republican leaders in Pennsylvania do not think Pat Toomey can beat Arlen Specter in a general election. While that may be true, now is the time to back the candidate and support him, not try to tear him down and throw another moderate into the front-runners spot. The leaders want former Gov. Tom Ridge to run for Senate. While he would be better than Specter, he still has his faults.

But a moderate is not the answer. We need a principled person that we can vote for. We need someone who will stand up for the constituents that voted him/her into office. We need someone who has the courage of his convictions. Now is the time to stand up for something, which would disqualify any moderate who is interested in the job.

Arlen Specter: It's about time you admitted your true allegiance

Well, the inevitable happened today. Sen. Arlen Specter came out and said he was going to change over to the Democrat Party. Is this news? He has been in their camp for years. He has voted with them more than he has voted with his own party. The Democrats could rely on his vote more often than some in their own party. So no, this is not really news, as this is something we have known anyway.

Sen. Specter knew that this is what he needed to do in order to be re-elected next year. Basically, all of the polls had him running behind Pat Toomey for the Republican nomination. And given his recent voting record, he knew he had no chance of catching up to Toomey. So, instead of going through the Republican primary having a debate on ideas, he chose to take the cowardly way out.

He does not want to have the debate, because he knows he will lose on the issues. He has lost touch with those who voted for him and put him in office. He has been in the Senate for several terms, and what does he have to show for it? Nothing. How has he represented those of us in his state who have voted for him in the past? Only according to his own interests and not on the interests of those who voted for him.

Does he have a good chance of winning the Democrat primary? Yes, he does. Does he have a good chance of winning a general election? Yes, he does. Pennsylvania has a high liberal population in and around Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. Since most of these people are Democrats, they would not have been able to vote for him in the primary, which is why he would have lost.

I am happy to see him go. He does not stand for anything that the Republican base (i.e. Conservatives) stands for. He has thrown us under the bus too many times. After George Bush and Rick Santorum stuck their necks out to support him in 2004, he basically stabbed them in the back. For him, it is all about notoriety, re-election, and a legacy (that he is still searching for). It has nothing to do with principles and doing what is right.

* I am amused listening to and reading the commentary of the media and other politicians.
President Obama was glad to see him join the party and promises to campaign for him.
* Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) said that “Sen. Specter did not leave the Republican Party. The party left Sen. Specter.”
* I have read message boards where people said that this is another nail in the coffin of the Republican Party.
* Some have said that the Republican Party has no business saying it is a ‘big tent’ party after running Specter out.
* Others have derided the party for ‘caving in’ to the right-wing of the party.
* Moderates have applauded him for standing up to the right-wingers.
* Sen. Specter has said that the Republicans are no longer the Party of Reagan that he belonged to in the 80’s.

Let me see if I can answer these.
* Is it any surprise that President Obama would campaign for him? My question is this: Is this even a news story?
* Why would one of the most liberal Democrat senators make such a stupid statement? Specter was never on board with his core constituents in the party. He was always a loose cannon. He has been testing the Democrat waters for a long time.
* This is not a nail in the coffin for the Republicans. Rather, this is what needed to happen in order for them to have a recrudescence in the political world. In fact, there are several other senators and congressman that I would like to see go along with Specter. Conservatism wins when it is on the ballot. We need look no further than Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984, as well as the congressional elections of 1994. When conservatism runs, it wins.
* Where is it written that the Republican Party must be a big tent? When did someone ever say that the Democrat Party needs to have a big tent? The left wingers would not allow conservatives or Bible-believers or pro-national security types to be in their party (and I have no idea why those people would want to take part in the Democrat Party). In order to have a big tent, you must compromise on core principles. This is not something that you can do and survive.
* These people that are labeled as right-wingers are the core constituents in the party. We are the normal, ordinary people that go to work every day and pay our taxes (on time). We love America and the freedom we have as Americans. We cherish the rights granted to Americans under the Constitution. We are not embarrassed by the greatness and power of America. We love God (we actually believe in Him). We are not a group that is going to hurt America, as this administration would like to think.
* What are moderates? They are people who are too gutless to take a tough stand on anything. They would rather see what decision the majority makes, and then they will side with the majority. Who cares what moderates think? I certainly do not. I want people on my side who are principled, not like the chaff, driven with the wind and tossed to and fro.
* The problem with the party is that we are no longer a party that embraces the ideals of Ronald Reagan. We do need to be careful not to worship the man, but stand up for the ideals and principles that he held dear. The problem with the Republican Party is that we got rid of those principles and ideals and started to cater to people like Specter. That is why we are not a strong party right now. We let people like Specter in charge and they ran the party into the ground. So it is not the ‘right-wingers’ that hurt the party. It is the wishy-washy people like Specter that hurt the party.

I say ‘Good riddance. Don’t let the door hit you where the good Lord split you.’ Once we regain our footing and stand firm on the conservative principles that the party once stood for, then we will become a great party again.

Why Arlen Specter must lose in 2010

As Sen. Arlen Specter is getting ready to run for the U.S. Senate (again), I can tell he is very nervous. The election is in November, 2010, yet he is already running ads in PA telling voters why they ought to vote for him and not for his opponents. This is not the sign of a confident candidate.

He is telling the Republican voter that they ought to nominate him (instead of one of the opponents) because he has a better chance of winning in a general election. He says that he can draw democrat votes. I will agree with him on this. He will draw an abundance of democrat votes, and he does stand a good chance of winning the general election if he makes it through the primary. He tells us that he has a better chance of keeping the democrats from winning a supermajority of the seats in the Senate (which would be 60 seats). This could be a very distinct possibility.

However, what Specter fails to realize is that the core conservative Republican is a principled person. He is not necessarily looking to vote simply for a political party so that the party can stay in power. This core conservative voter is looking to place his vote based on principle, based on those values that he holds dear. This is the very thing that has hurt the Republican Party over the last several elections. We became complacent and voted for people because of party affiliation and popularity, not based on what they stood for and what they were going to do once in office.

I am tired of prominent Republicans telling me that I should vote for someone simply due to party affiliation. I am tired of them telling me that we need Republicans willing to work with the other side. In other words, we need people in power who are willing to compromise on principle in order to remain in office. We are told by the leadership of our party, by the media, and by the other party that this is what we need to do in order to win elections.

But look where this line of thinking has taken the party. We ran a man for President in 2008 that shared very few conservative principles with those that he wanted to represent. He was more than willing to compromise principle for power. And he lost overwhelmingly. We have leaders in the House and Senate that have compromised their principles for some reason or another. And look where they are now. They are in a minority with no power to steer policy discussions away from the hard left.

Compromise of principles has not worked for our party. It never has, and it never will. It cannot change until we stand up and say that we have had enough. The leadership of the party is feckless. We need a recrudescence of conservative people, of conservative values, of American pride to lift this party out of the doldrums that we currently find ourselves sitting in.

Don’t listen to the media when they say conservatism cannot win. It has in the past, and it will win again. Look at Ronald Reagan. He had a very optimistic view of America with less government intervention in people’s lives. He won in a landslide. The Contract With America led to a conservative Republican revolution in the mid-90’s. Conservatism can win and will win, provided we send people out to run on those principles.

This is why Senator Specter must lose. He does not stand on conservative values. He does not cherish the right to life. He voted for the government overreach that we now call the bank bailouts. He will throw conservatives under the bus in order to advance his own progressive agenda. If he will not stand up for us, why should we vote for him?

Republicans and NASCAR: Are they heading down the same path?

As I was reflecting on the current political climate that we find ourselves immersed in today, I started to ponder the future of the once-great (and hopefully soon-to-be-great again) Republican Party. It has been much to my chagrin that we have allowed others to define the party of Lincoln and Reagan. Some of these defining our party are (but not limited to) the moderates and liberals in our own party, the Democrat Party, and the media. I could not help but be drawn to several similarities between the Republican Party and one of my favorite sports: NASCAR.

The first thing that may come to your mind when seeing this is that they (Republicans and NASCAR fans alike) are all a bunch of southern, redneck, racist, uneducated, Bible-thumping fools. However, that is not the case. While there may be a couple in the ranks that have some of these traits, we do not espouse them. If you look into supporters of any cause, I am sure you can find some questionable characters.

However, as I thought about this more, I saw some striking similarities.

1. The NASCAR fan and the core, conservative Republican voter are greatly misunderstood. The NASCAR fan takes his sport seriously. He enjoys it. It is practically a way of life. To him, there is nothing wrong with a car using a lot of gas and going in circles to see who can get around the track the most times before the checkered flag falls. It is a race of man and machine vs. other men and their machines. It is the thrill of the race, not the yearning for crashes that motivate these core fans. The fact that others may disdain their sport is of no concern to them. Likewise, the core, conservative Republican takes his politics seriously. It is who we are. It is how we live. It is our personal beliefs that shape our ideology. It is not our party that shapes the way we believe. We are not motivated by power. Rather, our motivation is based on principles of right and wrong. The fact that others disagree with us does not bother us.

2. The NASCAR fan and the core, conservative Republican are passionate about what they believe. NASCAR fans are passionate about their favorite drivers, about car manufacturers, about the type of tracks they enjoy the most, about the rules and rule changes. They have a passion for their sport and they treat it with respect. Likewise, the core, conservative Republicans have a passion for their beliefs, whether it is lower taxes, no abortions, no gay marriage, less government in our daily lives. We do not compromise on these things in order to be liked.

3. The NASCAR fan and the core, conservative Republican are fiercely pro-American and extremely patriotic. I have only had the chance to attend one Nascar race in my life (Richmond, September 2006). What I saw at that time were not only Gordon fans or Tony Stewart fans or Dale Earnhardt Jr. fans. I saw fans of America. I saw people who were not only flying the flags of their favorite drivers, but they were flying American flags. When it came time for the national anthem, everyone stood up, almost everyone removed his hat, many sang along. These are folks who care about this country and honor those who fight for it. Likewise, the core, conservative Republican cherishes this country and the freedoms we enjoy because we live here. It is not our desire to see the government take over our lives. Rather, we enjoy the freedom that our founding fathers passed on to us. People in this country should have the freedom to becomes everything they want to be. We salute the flag, we salute those who fought for our country, we honor those who gave their lives so that we may continue to enjoy the freedoms that we have.

4. The NASCAR fan and the core, conservative Republican believe our problems lie in this fact: We have moved away from our roots and those things that put us where we are today. I have been frustrated with NASCAR over the past several years as they have been moving towards making NASCAR into a glorified IROC series. Everyone races basically the same car. There is no room for ingenuity. Everything has to be within certain specifications, so there is almost no room for someone to gain an advantage through the use of creative engineering. While I see the need for some basic guidelines, it is now out of hand. The other thing that NASCAR has done that has hurt (in my opinion) is their effort to reach out to people who do not like NASCAR and use gimmicks to bring them on board as fans. While there is nothing wrong with reaching out to the non-fan, don’t compromise your core principles in order to pull in these non-fans. You risk losing the core fan by doing so. NASCAR needs to remember where it came from. Likewise, the Republican Party has allowed non-members to come in and re-shape it. The leaders over the past several years have compromised on core beliefs (mainly government spending and growing the size of government) in order to reach out and bring more people into the fold. Look where it has taken the parts: into the toilet. The party no longer has control in Congress or in the White House. We ran a candidate for President in 2008 who was the ultimate compromiser, and it did not help out at all. We got away from our roots. We forgot what made the Republican Party a great party.

As a NASCAR fan and a Republican, I believe that we need to stop allowing others to define us. I do not define those who I do not agree with. They are able to define themselves. They don’t need my help. We have to go out and define ourselves and let others know what we believe. We need to let others know that we do not appreciate their efforts to re-define us. We also need to let them know how many of us there are out here that do not appreciate what they are trying to do to us. Having these beliefs is one thing. Standing up for them is another. It is time that we go from simply having these beliefs to standing up and fighting for them.

The effort to re-write recent history

It is my contention that the education system that is in place in today’s public schools no longer teaches people how to think. Rather, they teach people what to think. The schools want to teach their own revised version of history instead of allowing people to find out for themselves the events that actually did happen.

Case in point is a letter-to-the-editor in today’s edition of the Patriot News. The paper contains a letter from some uninformed idiot concerning his view of how history has unfolded over the last 16 years. First, he claims that the Republicans squandered the Clinton budget surpluses of the late 90’s. If this dolt knew anything about history, he would know that it was not until 1994 and the Contract with America that these surpluses started to become a reality. Clinton did not want the budget that the Republicans passed. However, he did not have a choice. He signed it, the economy flourished, the Republican-controlled Congress actually controlled spending, and there were surpluses. Yet, Clinton takes the credit for something he did not really want and was basically forced to sign.

Next, this guy blames the federal budget deficit on Republicans, as if no Democrats helped out. After several years of being in control of Congress, many Republicans let the power go to their heads and started to govern like Democrats. They earmarked budget bills beyond comprehension. They did not look to control government spending. They sought out every chance to befriend Democrat ideas instead of standing up for conservative principles. Gov. Bobby Jindal was right when he said that the Republicans lost their way. They forgot the core principles that got them elected in the first place.

Then there was 9/11. While it may not be politically correct to point this out, that did change this country. It put an emphasis on defense and intelligence, which are 2 budget areas that had been decreased significantly over the years leading up to 2001. That was a time of pain for the airline industry. In fact, it hurt many areas of our immense industrial complex for quite some time.

When Congress passed a tax cut measure and President Bush signed it, a time of economic prosperity then followed. For the next several years, the economy flourished. In fact, even with lower tax rates, the revenues flowing into the federal treasury actually increased. But how can this be? It is due to the fact that people were able to keep more of their money and spend it as they saw fit. This spending allowed employers to hire more people given the higher consumer demand. Companies prospered and were able to pay their employees more. It was Reagan’s trickle-down economics at its finest.

However, the Republican leaders in Congress saw this influx of money to the treasury and couldn’t control themselves. They just had to go out and spend it. And the Democrats want to blame all of the deficit issues on the Republicans. Well, they did nothing to stop the spending. In fact, they helped out even more. They did not want to cut any federal program. They wanted to continue the spending orgy.

All of these excesses, combined with scandals but some top-tier Republicans, led to them being removed from power. Keep in mind, they were ousted mainly by Republicans, whether it was in a primary loss or Republicans not voting for them in general elections. We knew that the Democrats did the same things. They were just able to hide their corruption, with the willing help of many in the media.

Now, the few conservative Republicans in Congress are now speaking up and saying that we need to stop this spending spree. These conservatives were always there, they were just shut out of the process. It is amazing, though, that everyone says conservatives should lighten up and move to the middle in order to remain relevant. However, it is those moderates that are no longer serving in Congress. The conservatives are still there. So, to the chagrin of many, maybe it is the conservatives that are indeed the core of the Republican Party.

Democrats are now in power in Congress. They blame the Republicans for the budget deficit (and to a large degree, this is justified criticism). However, they should know that deficit spending is not a good thing. It does not work. If it was wrong for Republicans to ring up deficits year after year, how can they then justify ringing up much larger deficits in order to get us back on the right track? It makes no sense. Besides, government will not look to decrease spending in the future. Once they start the spending, they are not able or willing to decrease spending in the future.

This brings us full circle. How do people buy into this idea of larger deficits in the short-term (and they will continue into the future with the unrestrained spending we now face) being good for the economy? Are people this blind to what is going on? It is because they are being told what to think, not taught how to think.

Defeat Arlen Specter in 2010

Arlen Specter is the senior Senator from the state of Pennsylvania. He came to have that seat due to the untimely death of Sen. John Heinz in an airplane crash back in the 80's. Before that, we was a Congressman from the Philadelphia area.

Sen. Specter labels himself as a Republican. However, in practice, he is far from it. If you look up RINO in the dictionary, you will probably find his photo. He is pro-abortion. He was an opponent of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Anything that is conservative is everything that he is against.

The final straw for me was his backing of the President's stimulus package last week. He was one of the 3 Republicrat senators who helped to craft a 'compromise' bill. It did not matter to him how many of his constituents were against the bill (and we contacted him to let him know this). It did not matter to him that this is a bad bill and a bad idea. He was looking out for himself and what he thought he needed to do to be re-elected come November 2010.

Several months ago, it was rumored that Chris Matthews, the clown that hosts MSNBC's Hardball, would run against him for his Senate seat. However, Matthews chose not to do this. I think he knew he did not stand a chance, given Specter's liberal credentials.

In 2004, Specter was running for re-election. At that time, President Bush and Sen. Santorum (PA's junior Senator at the time) both stuck out their necks and supported him for re-election to the Senate, and he won. But at what cost? President Bush was not even sworn in for his second term when Senator Specter started taking shots at him. When Sen. Santorum ran for re-election in 2006, Specter did not support him with the same veracity that Santorum showed to Specter.

He continues to sell out the Republican Party (specifically, conservatives), as well as the people of Pennsylvania. Well, enough is enough. It is time for the Senator to be defeated by a conservative who has the best interests of the people of PA as his/her foremost priority. I do not care about bi-partisanship. I care about doing what is right. Should it happens that doing what is right is not politically correct or expedient, I do not care. I want someone who chooses to do what is right over what is expedient.

It is my hope and prayer that Pennsylvania has a good conservative candidate to run against Arlen Specter. In the coming months, we shall see who comes to the forefront of this race. I know that my energy will be spent trying to defeat our current Senator.

What do the Republicans need to do?

Many of the media elite and liberals, in general, think that the Republicans need to cater to the center, the moderates, in order to win elections. I do not think that this is true. Look at who our candidate was this year. It was John McCain, someone who would sell out his own mom if it benefited him politically. He was a media darling. Yet he did not win. It was not really even close.

The Republicans need to go back to their roots. They need to get rid of the moderates leading the parts and kick them to the curb and let them join the Democrat Party, as that is where their heart is anyway. The need is to return to the foundations of the Republican Party: low taxes, conservative principles, American exceptionalism, pro-life principles. That is what will re-invigorate the party. This is what we are looking for in our leaders.

It is time to bring out a new generation of Republicans to lead the party, not the same old people we have now who are selling out their priniciples in order to remain popular to those who never voted for them in the first place.

How do Republicans make a resurgence?

While liberals, the media and Hollywood elite, and Europeans are giddy with nothing but adulation and an arrogant exuberance over the fact that Obama is now the President-elect, we as conservative members of the Republican Party are left to reflect on how this happened. Many of the political pundits (especially those who will identify themselves as Republicans) have wondered aloud about how the Republican Party can make a resurgence and make themselves relevant again. This is definitely a point worth pondering. However, I find it highly ironic (and somewhat maddening) that it is these same people who are partly to blame for the recent demise of the party.

We remember back to 1994 when Newt Gingrich led a group of solid conservatives into Congress with the Contract With America, a plan to get this country back to its conservative roots. They won in a landslide, and because of them, much of the success of the 1990's was able to realized (even though Clinton still takes credit for it). Anyway, some of these folks left office, because they promised they would abide by self-imposed term limits (which is noble on their part). Others remained, but they lost their way over time.

They became arrogant in their power, losing sight of why they were there. They forgot that they were there to serve at the will of the people that voted them into office. They forgot about fiscal restraint, bringing on massive budget deficits. They cast aside the Contract With America (and the underlying conservative principles), and thus did not have a unifying theme that conservatives could get behind and promote. Then there were the scandals, whether it had to do with taking money from lobbyists or getting involved with interns. It is no wonder that they lost the majority in Congress in the 2006 mid-term elections.

Even with the existing incompetent, over-partisan, hateful, un-American, Democrat leadership in Congress, the Republican Party could not manage to get enough people to vote for them to get back into the majority. Why is this? After all, the approval rating of Congress is lower than that of the President. Apparently, they never learned from the mantra that "Those who do not learn from the past are destined to repeat it."

Now, everyone is scratching their heads, wondering where we go from here. It is almost like the game where you bend over, put your head on a baseball bat, and spin around 5 times. When you stand up, you have no idea where you are or where you are going. All of the pundits have suggestions for us, but they are not truly interested in a conservative resurgence. Their idea is for us to give in to the liberals and join them. Well, that is just not an option.

After giving it some thought, here is my outline on how the Republicans can re-find their way.

1. Don't listen to the media pundits and liberal elites. They have no real interest in seeing conservatives and Republicans come back to prominence on the national scene. They would rather destroy us, not help to build us up again. Look what they did to their dearly, beloved John McCain in this election. They loved him in 2000 and in 2004. They loved him when he was opposing President Bush. But when he ran against Obama, they were all over him. Now they love him again. It is not in the media's interest to have conservatives and Republicans come back into the limelight, so stop listening to them.
2. Get rid of the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only). We all know who these are. They have very little in common with the conservative base of the Republican Party. They find themselves voting many times with the liberal members of the other party. Send them a change-of-party form, and then they can be in a place where they can enjoy the company of those who agree with them. The more that the party tries to become moderate (at the request of media elite and democrats), the more seats that party loses in Congress. It does not take a rocket scientist to see this and understand it.
3. Understand that there are many more conservatives in this country than we realize. I have to admit that I was surprised to find out how many conservatives that I work with, people I never would have realized hold many of the same opinions that I do. Why else would Obama need to promise tax breaks and try to be more conservative in the weeks leading up to the general election? Because his people knew that he had to in order to win over some of the wishy-washy people that do not know how to make up their mind. Apparently, the Republican candidates and so-called conservative pundits don't realize this,a s their idea is always to reach out to the middle, becoming more liberal in the process.
4. Get back to your conservative roots. The government is in place to protect us and allow us to work and operate freely in this country. It is not there is put impediments (i.e. taxes, regulation, excessive laws). It was not the goal of the Founding Fathers to have an overly-regulated bureaucracy that gets in our way and restricts our freedom. They intentionally sought to restrict the role of government in the lives of the people so that they would be free to thrive and be successful. 'Bringing home the bacon' is not what I am looking for in a candidate. They allowed the deficit to balloon. (By the way, the deficit is mainly the fault of the Congress, as they are the ones that spend the money. Yet they blame the President.)
5. Don't compromise for the sake of 'reaching out to the other side.' There are some things on which we can find common ground with people from the other side of the political spectrum. However, on our core values, there is no room for compromise. The things we hold dear (lower taxes, less government, no abortions, no gay marriage, etc) should be non-negotiable. This is one thing that really annoys me. I vote for a candidate because of what he/she believes and stand for. Once they get into office, I do not expect them to throw that aside. I expect them to do their best to put those principles into practice and enact legislation that will help to reach those goals.
6. VOTE!!!!!! For those who sat at home for the election, I do not want to hear you complain. Why should we hear your voice now when it does not matter. Let's hear your voice when it does matter. Also, let's vote in our own primary so we can elect the good, solid, conservative leader that we want (and need). I know Rush Limbaugh had 'Operation Chaos' in gear for the primaries, but maybe if we would ahve voted for our own candidates, we may have had a more conservative voice that could best stand up for us and the beliefs that we hold dear.

There are many more things that we need to do, but this will be a good start. It is only when we get back to our conservative, Judeo-Christian values that we can find the success that we have had in the past.